wurlitzer or rhodes

[TineDaily]

>isn't the wurly too heavy to sit on the rhodes?

  Yeah, it probably is, but I use an X stand so the wurly sits a couple inches above the rhodes.  You need to have  some clearance, since the wurly jack is on the bottom of my piano (I use a right-angle cable), and the sustain assembly needs room, too.  The big downside is I have to move the wurly to make any rhodes adjustments, a perpetual necessity, so it seems...I'm always noticing  something slightly out of adjustment.

[jim]

i did a gig with a cover band once.
i didn't have all the sounds thay wanted cause i was playing a rhodes.
it was completely useless in that situation.
and they kept calling it a hammond.

it was funny.
and sad.

[Uptownruler]

i did a gig with a cover band once.
i didn't have all the sounds thay wanted cause i was playing a rhodes.
it was completely useless in that situation.
and they kept calling it a hammond.

it was funny.
and sad.

Can't we all relate to this!  Ugh!  It's not an organ!  :lol:

[andi85]

I've heard that too tonight.
"Can you play some Jimmy Smith stuff on that thing? I mean, such a blues thing."
No further comment.

[jim]

someone once told me that the rhodes was built "as a replacement for the vibraphone"

[andi85]

oh...well...i guess you have to add lots of reverb.

[toddague]

The comparisons of Wurlis and Rhodes are killing me here!  Maybe it's because I took piano lessons at the Mall in the '70s using the Wurli training set up (where the teacher could listen in on each student's Wurli) -- I've never been able to take the Wurli as seriously as the Rhodes.  Also -- the Nord Electro has a pretty good Rhodes simulation, but I generally can't deal with sampled Rhodes.  I can deal with sampled Wurli, though -- there are some passable versions out there from Roland, Korg, Nord...I wonder if the resistance to sampling is what gives the Rhodes (to me anyway) significantly more depth and versatility than a Wurli?